Highest and best tools

[ValueRanger]

Is there a Golden Ratio between your choices (software), and genetic hardware that is passed¹ on from generation to generation?

How much advance is due to prolific tools?

Do we have proportionate tools (software/philosophy) to equal our stunning advances in genetics?

Does one of the world's top problem solvers qualify higher than a religious leader, in advancing the highest and best behavioral science (again, software, or philosophy) tools?

Does the acceleration (see: technological singularity) of human data necessitate an equally qualified filtering state? Since everyone is a scientist/measurer (qiqo), should we be making the highest and best science education a prerequisite?

What happens to a system when the distance between the lowest and highest qualia state, is too much of a non-sequitur? Do these massive vacillations equally cause a massive fall?

What specific tool qualifies for eloquently bridging such systemic disintegration, and how can you make a difference?




¹ History has proven that a species will disintegrate the weak in favor of the strong (survival of the fittest). There is wide agreement, across several fields of science, that the greatest advancements in tools proportionately cause more sustainable splits in the species. What's your legacy? What do you want to pass on?

[PoeticVisionary]

I can't quote this because I'm trying to remember where I heard it. However, new studies have shown that nature does not always favor the strongest, it should be saying nature favors the most adaptable. Which it seems you are stating in you post. When I remember where I got this from I will post it. If I'm erroneous in this matter I will also post it.

[Fido]

Humans have only one tool, and it is our ability with forms, ideas, concepts, and etc....It is through forms that we adapt... Every change for humanity has been accomplished with a change of forms...A violent change of forms is a revolution...We only have to remember that what we are cannot easily be changed...We cannot change our basic needs, or our general attitude...People who ask why will people not change do not get the point... We change all the time, but to remain the same we change our forms....And Ideally, we should get more out of our forms than we put in... We build a house and get a lot of use out of it....Eventually we must put more into maintainance than we get out of the dwelling, and so we build a new one...The same is true of government, and law, and all moral forms...Physical forms can only be discovered and improved upon...

[rhinogrey]

Originally Posted by Fido

Humans have only one tool, and it is our ability with forms, ideas, concepts, and etc....It is through forms that we adapt... Every change for humanity has been accomplished with a change of forms...A violent change of forms is a revolution...We only have to remember that what we are cannot easily be changed...We cannot change our basic needs, or our general attitude...People who ask why will people not change do not get the point... We change all the time, but to remain the same we change our forms....And Ideally, we should get more out of our forms than we put in... We build a house and get a lot of use out of it....Eventually we must put more into maintainance than we get out of the dwelling, and so we build a new one...The same is true of government, and law, and all moral forms...Physical forms can only be discovered and improved upon...

There's a dominant tendency in Western culture to preserve, to deny motion and honor tradition. Your words have a ring of the Tibetan Buddhist concept of impermanence; it seems they've assimilated the physical principle you discuss into their metaphysical worldview; eg. they do not, as we do, preserve famous artworks or cultural icons, they build them anew. We hang on to the past like it is god, what we must understand is that god is the present.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by rhinogrey

There's a dominant tendency in Western culture to preserve, to deny motion and honor tradition. Your words have a ring of the Tibetan Buddhist concept of impermanence; it seems they've assimilated the physical principle you discuss into their metaphysical worldview; eg. they do not, as we do, preserve famous artworks or cultural icons, they build them anew. We hang on to the past like it is god, what we must understand is that god is the present.

People hang onto the present at their peril...Only by making certain of the future can they be sure of today... Only the dead live in the past, and that is no place to be...

[urangutan]

Survival of the fittest, is a genetic myth within the human race. It is a theory that applies in multiple birth. One Ovum released by the female human and a few hundred thousand sperm buddies, if the count is calculated so. Value Ranger, are you implying at all, that this is the agenda of such a theory.

You can stretch the qualia state of high and low, as far as you like. Provided you keep the masses fooled in the middle. The rich listen to the really poor because they speak of necessity, while the middle pages are magazine comercials. This is where we are, the U.S. of A., Australia, most other western countries. Notice anything about the failed ones.

The tool you ask of is not the ear. I have yet to see a qualified eloquent systematic disintegration based on one listening to the other. I would say the gift of giving and recieving, with honour and respect would come pretty close.

I like the ring in Fido's depiction, Rhinogrey. It lacks personality but are we concerned with the trivia of emotional sustenance, when considering change. I would like to think we should be but that is my opinion. I would also beg to differ, in that God is concern of the present so as to effect our past and in doing so, alow the people to assist the future.

[Fido]

You know that multiple births are not a asset to a women in any sense...The evil twin is the story of our past...People would judge the twins to see which was evil, and destroy it, or adopt it out... Among the Native Americans, this practice made twinning more common rather than less, because more mothers survived and more of the babies survived because their mothers survived, and the surviving mother passed on the trait to others still...

Survival of the fittest is not our problem, but to survive fit; and for that we need a large and diverse gene pool... We might also try to cut down on the culs...Encourage them not to breed, or something...

[ValueRanger]

Originally Posted by urangutan

Survival of the fittest, is a genetic myth within the human race. It is a theory that applies in multiple birth. One Ovum released by the female human and a few hundred thousand sperm buddies, if the count is calculated so. Value Ranger, are you implying at all, that this is the agenda of such a theory.

"Fit" and adaptability are perfectly compatible. We constantly bridge value gaps in hierarchical topology (Form). Consider the problem solver, of which each of us are, that fits the need with a solve. This is our sustainable heritage that the highest and best philosophy need fit.

We are constantly discovering/evolving a more-and-more pliable hardware, so surely philosophy must be kept on par, and will thusly reflect in the bridging of generation, to generation.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by ValueRanger

"Fit" and adaptability are perfectly compatible. We constantly bridge value gaps in hierarchical topology (Form). Consider the problem solver, of which each of us are, that fits the need with a solve. This is our sustainable heritage that the highest and best philosophy need fit.

We are constantly discovering/evolving a more-and-more pliable hardware, so surely philosophy must be kept on par, and will thusly reflect in the bridging of generation, to generation.

I know it is just an analogy, but people do not have hardware... What is more, the basic person is not adaptable at all...Our human needs are our human needs and they cannot be denied...Yet we have adapted to almost every enviroment on the earth by our use of forms, which we can change...Ask why people do not more often change their minds... They cannot change their minds because it would throw all their notions of truth out of the window in pieces... What we think is what we are...What we feel is who we are; and we change forms because we cannot change ourselves...Or our hardware...